Posted on 07/14/2006 8:00:42 AM PDT by weps4ret
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America
Report to Leaders
June 2005
On March 23, 2005, you announced the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. At that time, you instructed Ministers to create an architecture which would further enhance the security of North America while at the same time promote the economic well-being of our citizens and position North America to face and meet future challenges. This effort builds on the excellent, long-standing relations among our three countries. The response to your request is attached.
-snip-
The post is too long for full posting. Do not know if anyone else has seen this.
(Excerpt) Read more at spp.gov ...
By the way sinkspur, in the event that the legislation reminds you of something but you can't quite place it be sure to look at how things are done in the EU.
The two bear a striking resemblance.
That's not a tax bill, unless you count U.S. legislation to raise Mexican taxes as one.
Take a look at post 39 slick.
Not a tax? Really? Just where do you think the U.S. is going to get the money for it's portion of the "fund" if not from taxes?
From the tooth fairy?
You are not going to deport 12 million people. They will have to be encouraged to go back, not herded back in buses.
I see Cornyn's suggestion as a "pay me now or pay me later" proposition.
What legislation? There's no legislation.
That legislation said nothing about creating a new tax.
Not a tax bill. If you can't understand the difference, don't bother.
Slick, you said create a new tax. They could shift money that has already been allocated for some other purpose.
Yeah, I guess the unions had absolutely nothing to do with driving wage costs so high that manufacturers look around for a guy who can turn a screw for less.
And the cheap goods at Wal-Mart benefit everybody, including American workers.
Your final sentence is so silly as to not even deserve a reply.
"and keep those brown people off your roof." You said something about race.
I want all illegals to go home where they belong, it's not my or the United States governments responsibility to create opportunites for them in their homelands.
You don't need to deport all 12 million. If you take away their jobs, means of transportation and goverment benefits the vast majority will self deport. Then all you have to do is round up the stragglers.
I prefer a pay never proposition.
And that money would come from......that's right, taxes.
Shifting it from somehwere else doesn't change what it is.
"Global/open borders brigade? They are a brigade now? Can you name one of them?"
You'd be one of them.
Actually, you could probably say that those U.S. jobs went to Mexico, from Mexico to China, and from China to Viet Nam. The problem is that China has lost as much as eight times as many manufacturing jobs as the U.S. and Viet Nam only picked-up a few, so it appears as though they are being vented into the atmosphere.
Aaaah, I see now. Confronted with the truth of the matter you're going to argue legislative definitions.
Interesting that none of you seem willing to acknowledge what a theft of U.S. taxpayers money this would be.
Very interesting indeed.
Or haven't you already noticed that in your life?
So a bill is not legislation? Are you really going to try and go there?
Thanks. I won't wait for you to find just one comment that I've made here or elsewhere over the past 7 years that favors open borders. Do you know what a strawman logical fallacy is?
You said a CREATE a new tax. There was nothing in the legislation about your new tax. You created a boogeyman in your own head.
Lol! If you knew the first thing about my life sinkspur you'd realize how stupid a thing that was to say.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.